No Bull, No Fluff, No Smudges
Your news source for
Flagler, Florida and Beyond

Palm Coast Approves New Gated Community for L-Section by Grand Haven Developer

| December 8, 2016

The homes at the proposed Matanzas Lake development would be similar to homes at Grand Haven, above.

The homes at the proposed Matanzas Lake development would be similar to homes at Grand Haven, above.

Palm Coast’s L Section may get a new gated community of some 102 homes on 6,000 square-foot lots, with two lakes and a canal, all of which are yet to be dug, creating waterfront access to a third of the properties and improving drainage in the area. The development, Matanzas Lake, is conceived by Jim Cullis, developer of Grand Haven in southeast Palm Coast.


Cullis compared the proposed homes to properties at Grand Haven currently selling between $300,000 and $400,000.

Palm Coast’s planning board voted 6-1 on Nov. 16 to recommend the project for approval by the city council. The council unanimously did so Tuesday evening, ratifying the necessary rezoning for the project, after an 80-minute discussion.

“This is a classic in-fill site,” Cullis told the council, using the term intended to describe what is essentially the opposite of sprawl: in-fill development seeks to “fill-in” areas already surrounded by development, without extending development outward. Palm Coast includes thousands of such vacant lots, and several large parcels that may be filled in with larger developments.

The project has nothing to do with the troubled Matanzas Woods Golf Club in the same section of town, though Cullis has had his eyes on acquiring that property as well.

The rezoning at Matanzas Lake is tied to two city goals: to continue rezoning several areas in the city from parcels zoned for multi-family homes to single-family homes, and to improve stormwater drainage systems. Cullis’s Matanzas Lakes does both.

The nearly 29-acre rectangular parcel Cullis was bringing before the council had been zoned for up to 142 multi-family homes—that is, town houses and condominiums. The rezoning will make it eligible for 108 single-family homes built around a central lake, with a clubhouse and swimming pool near the main entrance on Laramie Drive.

The 6,000 square-foot lots are similar to about a quarter of the lot sizes at Grand Haven, but they are smaller than the typical 80-foot lot in Palm Coast. “These are patio homes,” Palm Coast Mayor Milissa Holland explained. “It’s about choices and options that we offer to our residents. This is one of many that are coming in to different communities as a way of residents that are retired, that are elderly, that do not want big properties or homes to take care of, and it offers them the different option.” The transition to such lots is not uncommon, she said.

The project will also help the city improve drainage in the area. In heavy rains at nearby U.S. 1, water backs up into a canal, then into ditches, then into swales, putting yards and potential homes at risk. The city has been working on improvements by re-digging ditches and adding stormwater storage capacity. It also owns an 11-acre parcel that runs the length of the Cullis property, to its east. Cullis is proposing to dig that land at his own company’s expense into another lake, providing room for overflow stormwater, as well as docks for kayaks and similarly light boats for residents of his development. Cullis would also pay the $100,000 for environmental permitting and mitigation costs. He would also dig a canal along the southern edge of the development, parallel to Lynbrook Drive.

The city is also making a concession in the form of park impact fee credits worth $15,300. But the city is making the Cullis development partially contingent on progress and completion of the artificial water bodies on city land.

The 29 acres Cullis owned envelop a small, 2-acre enclave owned by the city. The agreement approved Tuesday swaps that acreage for 3 acres split into two properties elsewhere, to help the city’s drainage system, rendering the Cullis property itself whole.

In a promise to Matanzas Woods neighbors, Cullis said he’s committed to ensuring that the new development will mostly not be a haven for “transient” or short-term housing. The rental restrictions, he said, are similar to those at Grand Haven: “You can’t rent your home any less than a month at a time any more than three times a year,” Cullis said, “ so that keeps out any type of transient rental, and I’ve committed to making that condition in our approval here.”

There was some concern about traffic, with the gated community’s twin entrances and exits both on Laramie Drive. A transportation consultant told the council that the new development would generate about the same amount of traffic as if the acreage had been developed under its previous zoning.

Eric Josie, a resident whose property neighbors the project, protested to the council that meetings Cullis held with neighboring residents were not properly noticed, as “many of the residents are not aware of this project.” The main concern was the Laramie Drive entrances and exits, which he said could not accommodate that large a number of new homes. Another neighborhood resident raised concerns about traffic making bus stops more hazardous for students along Laramie. (City officials disagreed with Josie’s claims of legal improprieties regarding notices about meetings.)

But if numerous residents had not had a chance to hear about the project, several who did speak to the council had only applause for it.

Heather Beaven, a London Drive resident, said she “wholeheartedly” supports the project if it’s going to “jump-start that neighborhood.” She was one of the buyers of property near the ill-fated golf course. “Those are our nest eggs, those are our biggest purchases, and if we can bring somebody in with the caliber and the history of Mr. Cullis and his developments, if we can jump-start Matanzas Woods into the newest Grand Haven, I cannot support that enough,” Beaven said.

Brad West, a 12-year resident of Matanzas Woods and another property owner along the golf course, commended the transformation of the zone into single-family housing and called it an overall win for all. “Any time you put a house on water, property values just naturally goes up around here,” West said, “so everybody there that’s going to win, tax revenue goes up, it’s going to be a huge improvement for the area and the stormwater piece, I know exactly what you’re talking about, I’ve lived through that on several occasions, so having more drainage area just makes sense. And thank you to Mr. Cullis for having a commitment to the neighborhood when he hasn’t always been very well received around there.”

Three others echoed the same enthusiasm, with the only caveat regarding traffic concerns.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

9 Responses for “Palm Coast Approves New Gated Community for L-Section by Grand Haven Developer”

  1. Ray D says:

    Coincidence that the city filed a Lis Pendens on the course property? I seem to recall a meeting with the city manager about three years ago with a group concerned L section residents. We, the residents were concerned about the status of the golf course property. At that meeting we were told by the city manager that we would be getting a retention pond off Laramie where the house on the hill stood! It seems Mr Cullis will be the recipient of that retention pond.

  2. woody says:

    6,000 sq ft. lots?My lot is almost 12,000 and thats to small.Sounds like Queens.

  3. TheBoldTruth69 says:

    But many transients live in the L section. And the R section and the LL section and the S section and the E section… Jesus. I am moving to Ormond Beach where the city cares…

  4. Anonymous says:

    If the crime wasn’t what it is in Palm Coast then the communities wouldn’t have to be gated. The Sheriff repeatedly tells us that crime is down, but the arrest listing proves otherwise. Not all people who rent or own in a gated community are good….just saying.

  5. JM says:

    How exactly is this going to help the L-Section other than maybe drainage for that small area 1-2 streets..? Just because you build what you think are $300k-$400k homes doesn’t mean they will sell.. Who would want to buy a $400k home on a 6,000 Sqft lot? That would mean that those homes would have to be less than around 2,000 Sqft to have any type of yard.. That’s some tiny homes. The properties that were all zoned “multi-family” had already been re-zoned so really that statement was just a mis-direction to keep L-section residents off the legitimate concerns. I realize that our section will never see a golf course again and that the guy who bought it is just a simpleton investor who tricked the county. But, at some point can’t something be done here worth while? Building houses on top of houses will not bring people’s home values up at all. Don’t be so easily mislead. This article said that this property has nothing to do with the golf course property, so, building houses around a retention pond and a small canal will do absolutely nothing for this area. I foresee a neighborhood that starts out at the mid-300k and starts to decline overtime with several empty lots. Yet another unfinished neighborhood for awhile.

    What happens to the surrounding residents when that happens? The home values decline. Why? Because the homes in the unfinished neighborhood begin to get sold for less than the price of the exsisting homes in the area. As a home buyer at that point you would rather buy new for less, than “old” for more. So, the unfinished neighborhood eventually fills up but only at the price of the current residents home values expense. Ask me how I know this… I’ve lived it and seen this exact situation happen and I’m still in the negative on that home and unable to get rid of it.

    The only thing that would help the L-Section is if there was some gas stations, publix, etc etc up here and if someone built maybe some parks and canals on the old golf course property.

    To the city, don’t mess this up like you did “town center”.. You had plenty of opportunities to use that land well to include missing an easy deal with Tanger Outlets (ended up in Daytona now). Yet you are loading it with tons of houses now.. Why do you continue to build? There’s nothing here to attract people.. No jobs, nothing for children etc etc.. You mention “retired and Elderly” in this article.. So, I guess no one else exists here if they are below the age of 62..

    I really hope that I am wrong here, really, I do..

  6. Heather says:

    JM, it’s privately owned land. Owners have property rights. This has nothing to do with what the City could or couldn’t do for the area. This 28 acres and the golf course are privately owned. The City did what it could do by holding Mr. Cullis to the highest standards. Standards, by the way, he has continually exceeded in his business practice.

    What’s going to artificially deflate prices in the area is all these negative, in welcoming comments. About tiny homes, tiny lots, traffic and transients.

  7. JM says:

    Heather, totally get that its private property and the cities hands are seemingly tied. Yes, glad that the city is holding this gentleman to standards, I am sure he is not a bad guy. However, I’ve owned several homes in my short lifetime, I currently own 3 homes, so, I’ve seen the good and the bad. This idea of filling Palm Coast with more and more homes doesn’t make any sense to me given its current posture. I am not saying it should be filled with tons of businesses either but there should be some sort of balance. Yes, statistical data shows that Palm Coast is expanding population wise, but, these stay-at-home realtors need to move homes that are currently empty (there’s plenty of them).

    While a neighborhood on that property is probably the only thing I would agree that should go there, this isn’t the right time for this section. People are making negative comments because it is a reality. If there was nothing at all wrong with what’s going on no one care. Just because you put some sort of poster child developer on building a neighborhood doesn’t mean it’s the right time or a great idea. To say that this will raise home values in the area is absolutely a false statement. Comments on an article do not bring home values down, but empty lots, poor timing and poor planning do.

  8. Lorraine says:

    Does anyone know about the 32 homes off of Leidel drive that was approved by the city of palm coast.

    They said it wa approved and would start building this year.

    Thanks
    Lorraine

  9. Lorraine says:

    Yes I do understand about traffic. But does anyone know if they are still going ahead with this project.

Leave a Reply

Read FlaglerLive's Comment Policy | Subscribe to the Comment Feed rss flaglerlive comment feed rss

More stories on FlaglerLive
Loading

Get FlaglerLive Alerts by Email

Sign Up for email alerts to new stories.

ADVERTISEMENTS

suppert flaglerlive flagler live palm coast flagler county news pierre tristam florida
fcir florida center for investigative reporting
Advertisement
Log in | FlaglerLive, P.O. Box 354263, Palm Coast, FL 32135-4263 | 386/586-0257

FlaglerLive.com